§Why CasetextPricing

Ferrari, et al v. Accredo Health, Inc., et al

RESPONSE in Opposition re MOTION for Summary Judgment

54 Cited authorities

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.

    477 U.S. 242 (1986)   Cited 239,217 times   38 Legal Analyses
    Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"

  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett

    477 U.S. 317 (1986)   Cited 218,869 times   40 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"

  3. Tellabs v. Makor Issues Rights

    551 U.S. 308 (2007)   Cited 9,348 times   105 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a strong inference is one that is "cogent and at least as compelling as any opposing inference"

  4. Dura Pharmaceuticals v. Broudo

    544 U.S. 336 (2005)   Cited 3,593 times   67 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the securities statutes have a private of action “not to provide investors with broad insurance against market losses, but to protect them against those economic losses that misrepresentations actually cause”

  5. Basic Inc. v. Levinson

    485 U.S. 224 (1988)   Cited 3,379 times   310 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the District Court appropriately certified the class based on the presumption of reliance

  6. TSC Industries, Inc. v. Northway, Inc.

    426 U.S. 438 (1976)   Cited 2,506 times   69 Legal Analyses
    Holding that materiality may be resolved at summary judgment "if the established omissions are so obviously important to an investor that reasonable minds cannot differ on the question of materiality"

  7. Herman MacLean v. Huddleston

    459 U.S. 375 (1983)   Cited 1,317 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an express remedy under § 11 of the 1933 Act for misleading registration statements did not preclude an overlapping implied private cause of action for fraudulent misrepresentation under § 10(b) of the 1934 Act

  8. Sparling v. Daou

    411 F.3d 1006 (9th Cir. 2005)   Cited 1,305 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that scienter is an element of § 10(b) claim

  9. Ganino v. Citizens Utilities Co.

    228 F.3d 154 (2d Cir. 2000)   Cited 970 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding on the basis of Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 99 that "numerical benchmark" are informative but not the "exclusive" test

  10. Michaels Bldg. Co. v. Ameritrust Co., N.A.

    848 F.2d 674 (6th Cir. 1988)   Cited 705 times
    Holding that plaintiffs alleging RICO civil fraud claims that failed to satisfy Rule 9(b)'s particularity requirement were entitled to opportunity for discovery under Rule 11(b) before their claims were dismissed

  11. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 333,232 times   158 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

  12. Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 8   Cited 160,289 times   196 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

  13. Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 9   Cited 39,551 times   328 Legal Analyses
    Requiring that fraud be pleaded with particularity

  14. Rule 11 - Signing Pleadings, Motions, and Other Papers; Representations to the Court; Sanctions

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 11   Cited 36,629 times   145 Legal Analyses
    Holding an "unrepresented party" to the same standard as an attorney

  15. Rule 5 - Serving and Filing Pleadings and Other Papers

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 5   Cited 22,753 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Allowing service by filing papers with the court's electronic-filing system

  16. Section 78u - Investigations and actions

    15 U.S.C. § 78u   Cited 2,326 times   86 Legal Analyses
    Granting the SEC the power to seek civil penalties for violations of the Exchange Act

  17. Section 78u-5 - Application of safe harbor for forward-looking statements

    15 U.S.C. § 78u-5   Cited 1,276 times   22 Legal Analyses
    Listing as an exclusion from the safe harbor "forward-looking statement in connection with a going private transaction"

  18. Section 7241 - Corporate responsibility for financial reports

    15 U.S.C. § 7241   Cited 109 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Requiring corporate officers to disclose such fraud in SEC filings

  19. Section 202.5 - Enforcement activities

    17 C.F.R. § 202.5   Cited 197 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Explaining that "the disposition of any ... matter [in a civil action brought by the SEC] may not, expressly or impliedly, extend to any criminal charges that have been, or may be, brought against any such person" because the SEC does not have the "authority or responsibility," which are "vested in the [DOJ]"